Crossover in evolutionary algorithms and evolutionary computation, also called recombination, is a genetic operator used to combine the genetic information of two parents to generate new offspring. It is one way to stochastically generate new solutions from an existing population, and is analogous to the crossover that happens during sexual reproduction in biology. New solutions can also be generated by cloning an existing solution, which is analogous to asexual reproduction. Newly generated solutions may be mutated before being added to the population. The aim of recombination is to transfer good characteristics from two different parents to one child. Different algorithms in evolutionary computation may use different data structures to store genetic information, and each genetic representation can be recombined with different crossover operators. Typical data structures that can be recombined with crossover are bit arrays, vectors of real numbers, or trees. The list of operators presented below is by no means complete and serves mainly as an exemplary illustration of this dyadic genetic operator type. More operators and more details can be found in the literature. == Crossover for binary arrays == Traditional genetic algorithms store genetic information in a chromosome represented by a bit array. Crossover methods for bit arrays are popular and an illustrative example of genetic recombination. === One-point crossover === A point on both parents' chromosomes is picked randomly, and designated a 'crossover point'. Bits to the right of that point are swapped between the two parent chromosomes. This results in two offspring, each carrying some genetic information from both parents. === Two-point and k-point crossover === In two-point crossover, two crossover points are picked randomly from the parent chromosomes. The bits in between the two points are swapped between the parent organisms. Two-point crossover is equivalent to performing two single-point crossovers with different crossover points. This strategy can be generalized to k-point crossover for any positive integer k, picking k crossover points. === Uniform crossover === In uniform crossover, typically, each bit is chosen from either parent with equal probability. Other mixing ratios are sometimes used, resulting in offspring which inherit more genetic information from one parent than the other. In a uniform crossover, we don’t divide the chromosome into segments, rather we treat each gene separately. In this, we essentially flip a coin for each chromosome to decide whether or not it will be included in the off-spring. == Crossover for integer or real-valued genomes == For the crossover operators presented above and for most other crossover operators for bit strings, it holds that they can also be applied accordingly to integer or real-valued genomes whose genes each consist of an integer or real-valued number. Instead of individual bits, integer or real-valued numbers are then simply copied into the child genome. The offspring lie on the remaining corners of the hyperbody spanned by the two parents P 1 = ( 1.5 , 6 , 8 ) {\displaystyle P_{1}=(1.5,6,8)} and P 2 = ( 7 , 2 , 1 ) {\displaystyle P_{2}=(7,2,1)} , as exemplified in the accompanying image for the three-dimensional case. === Discrete recombination === If the rules of the uniform crossover for bit strings are applied during the generation of the offspring, this is also called discrete recombination. === Intermediate recombination === In this recombination operator, the allele values of the child genome a i {\displaystyle a_{i}} are generated by mixing the alleles of the two parent genomes a i , P 1 {\displaystyle a_{i,P_{1}}} and a i , P 2 {\displaystyle a_{i,P_{2}}} : α i = α i , P 1 ⋅ β i + α i , P 2 ⋅ ( 1 − β i ) w i t h β i ∈ [ − d , 1 + d ] {\displaystyle \alpha _{i}=\alpha _{i,P_{1}}\cdot \beta _{i}+\alpha _{i,P_{2}}\cdot \left(1-\beta _{i}\right)\quad {\mathsf {with}}\quad \beta _{i}\in \left[-d,1+d\right]} randomly equally distributed per gene i {\displaystyle i} The choice of the interval [ − d , 1 + d ] {\displaystyle [-d,1+d]} causes that besides the interior of the hyperbody spanned by the allele values of the parent genes additionally a certain environment for the range of values of the offspring is in question. A value of 0.25 {\displaystyle 0.25} is recommended for d {\displaystyle d} to counteract the tendency to reduce the allele values that otherwise exists at d = 0 {\displaystyle d=0} . The adjacent figure shows for the two-dimensional case the range of possible new alleles of the two exemplary parents P 1 = ( 3 , 6 ) {\displaystyle P_{1}=(3,6)} and P 2 = ( 9 , 2 ) {\displaystyle P_{2}=(9,2)} in intermediate recombination. The offspring of discrete recombination C 1 {\displaystyle C_{1}} and C 2 {\displaystyle C_{2}} are also plotted. Intermediate recombination satisfies the arithmetic calculation of the allele values of the child genome required by virtual alphabet theory. Discrete and intermediate recombination are used as a standard in the evolution strategy. == Crossover for permutations == For combinatorial tasks, permutations are usually used that are specifically designed for genomes that are themselves permutations of a set. The underlying set is usually a subset of N {\displaystyle \mathbb {N} } or N 0 {\displaystyle \mathbb {N} _{0}} . If 1- or n-point or uniform crossover for integer genomes is used for such genomes, a child genome may contain some values twice and others may be missing. This can be remedied by genetic repair, e.g. by replacing the redundant genes in positional fidelity for missing ones from the other child genome. In order to avoid the generation of invalid offspring, special crossover operators for permutations have been developed which fulfill the basic requirements of such operators for permutations, namely that all elements of the initial permutation are also present in the new one and only the order is changed. It can be distinguished between combinatorial tasks, where all sequences are admissible, and those where there are constraints in the form of inadmissible partial sequences. A well-known representative of the first task type is the traveling salesman problem (TSP), where the goal is to visit a set of cities exactly once on the shortest tour. An example of the constrained task type is the scheduling of multiple workflows. Workflows involve sequence constraints on some of the individual work steps. For example, a thread cannot be cut until the corresponding hole has been drilled in a workpiece. Such problems are also called order-based permutations. In the following, two crossover operators are presented as examples, the partially mapped crossover (PMX) motivated by the TSP and the order crossover (OX1) designed for order-based permutations. A second offspring can be produced in each case by exchanging the parent chromosomes. === Partially mapped crossover (PMX) === The PMX operator was designed as a recombination operator for TSP like Problems. The explanation of the procedure is illustrated by an example: === Order crossover (OX1) === The order crossover goes back to Davis in its original form and is presented here in a slightly generalized version with more than two crossover points. It transfers information about the relative order from the second parent to the offspring. First, the number and position of the crossover points are determined randomly. The resulting gene sequences are then processed as described below: Among other things, order crossover is well suited for scheduling multiple workflows, when used in conjunction with 1- and n-point crossover. === Further crossover operators for permutations === Over time, a large number of crossover operators for permutations have been proposed, so the following list is only a small selection. For more information, the reader is referred to the literature. cycle crossover (CX) order-based crossover (OX2) position-based crossover (POS) edge recombination voting recombination (VR) alternating-positions crossover (AP) maximal preservative crossover (MPX) merge crossover (MX) sequential constructive crossover operator (SCX) The usual approach to solving TSP-like problems by genetic or, more generally, evolutionary algorithms, presented earlier, is either to repair illegal descendants or to adjust the operators appropriately so that illegal offspring do not arise in the first place. Alternatively, Riazi suggests the use of a double chromosome representation, which avoids illegal offspring.
Competition in artificial intelligence
Competition in artificial intelligence refers to the rivalry among companies, research institutions, and governments to develop and deploy the most capable artificial intelligence (AI) systems. The competition spans multiple domains, including large language models (LLMs), autonomous vehicles, robotics, computer vision systems, natural language processing (NLP), and AI-optimized hardware. == Background == Competition in AI is driven by potential economic, strategic, and scientific advantages. Breakthroughs in AI can enhance productivity, enable new products and services, and provide geopolitical leverage. The field has experienced rapid progress since the mid-2010s, particularly in machine learning and artificial neural networks, leading to intense rivalry among leading actors. == Corporate competition == Major technology companies are among the most visible competitors in AI. In the United States, firms such as OpenAI, Google DeepMind, Meta Platforms, Microsoft, Anthropic, and Nvidia compete in building advanced LLMs, generative AI platforms, and AI-optimized graphics processing units (GPUs). In China, companies such as Baidu, Alibaba Group, Tencent, and startups such DeepSeek have become leaders in AI deployment, often with state backing. The "[war for talent]" in AI research has become a defining feature of corporate competition. Leading firms often recruit top AI researchers from rivals, sometimes offering multi-million-dollar compensation packages. == National competition == Governments see leadership in AI as a strategic priority. The United States has funded AI research for military, economic, and societal applications, while China has set a target to lead the world in AI by 2030 through its "New Generation Artificial Intelligence Development Plan". Other nations, including the UK, India, Israel, Russia, South Korea, and members of the European Union, have launched national AI strategies. In February 2026 Anthropic said Chinese companies - DeepSeek, Moonshot AI, and MiniMax - were conducting "distillation attacks" in an attempt to copy their model's capabilities, and warned that business wars were closely tied to geopolitical ones: "foreign labs that illicitly distill American models can remove safeguards, feeding model capabilities into their own military, intelligence, and surveillance systems." == Sectors of competition == === Large language models and chatbots competition === Competition to produce the most capable generative text models, with benchmarks such as MMLU and ARC used to evaluate performance has been on scale since the emergence of AI. These systems leverage deep learning, especially transformer architectures, to understand and generate human-like language. Companies and research groups globally compete to develop chatbots that are more capable, reliable, and context-aware. Among the most well-known chatbots is ChatGPT, developed by OpenAI. Since its public release in 2022, ChatGPT has rapidly gained widespread attention for its ability to engage in coherent and versatile conversations, assist with creative writing, and solve complex problems. In response, technology firms introduced competing chatbots aiming to challenge or surpass ChatGPT's capabilities. Notably, DeepSeek, a Chinese AI company, launched an advanced chatbot integrated with their R1 language model, emphasizing strong natural language understanding and multilingual support. Similarly, Grok, developed by xAI (company), integrates conversational AI into vehicles and digital assistants, combining natural language processing with real-time data for personalized user interaction. These chatbots not only compete in language tasks but also demonstrate strategic reasoning capabilities by playing complex games such as chess and Go. This form of competition is reminiscent of historic AI milestones set by programs such as Deep Blue and AlphaGo. The OpenAI’s ChatGPT has been tested in playing chess at various levels, while DeepSeek’s chatbot showcased its prowess in online chess tournaments in early 2024, winning several matches against human and AI opponents. Grok, leveraging Tesla's vast data infrastructure, has demonstrated real-time strategic decision-making in simulation environments that include chess-like games. The competition pushes rapid innovation, with firms racing to improve chatbot conversational depth, reduce biases, increase factual accuracy, and integrate multimodal inputs like images and videos. At the same time, the competition raises questions about AI safety, ethical use, and the societal impacts of increasingly human-like chatbots. === Autonomous vehicles === Companies such as Waymo, Tesla, and Baidu are racing to deploy safe and reliable self-driving car technology. === AI chips === Rivalry between Nvidia, AMD, Intel, and Huawei in designing processors optimized for AI workloads. === Military applications === Development of AI-enabled drones, surveillance systems, and decision-support tools, with associated ethical debates. == Events == In 2023, OpenAI released GPT-4, prompting competitors such as Google DeepMind to accelerate the release of their own models, including Gemini. In 2024, Chinese AI company DeepSeek launched the R1 model, leading OpenAI to release an open-source system, GPT-OSS, as a strategic countermeasure. In 2022, Tesla and Waymo both expanded autonomous taxi services in U.S. cities, competing for regulatory approval and public trust. The U.S. Department of Defense's Project Maven and China's AI-enabled surveillance programs have been cited as examples of military AI rivalry. In 2025, Microsoft hired several senior engineers from Google DeepMind, highlighting the ongoing "talent poaching" competition in the AI sector. == Risks and concerns == Critics warn that unrestrained competition in AI can undermine safety, ethics, and governance. Concerns include the proliferation of biased or unsafe models, escalation in autonomous weapons, and reduced cooperation on safety standards.
Event condition action
Event condition action (ECA) is a short-cut for referring to the structure of active rules in event-driven architecture and active database systems. Such a rule traditionally consisted of three parts: The event part specifies the signal that triggers the invocation of the rule The condition part is a logical test that, if satisfied or evaluates to true, causes the action to be carried out The action part consists of updates or invocations on the local data This structure was used by the early research in active databases which started to use the term ECA. Current state of the art ECA rule engines use many variations on rule structure. Also other features not considered by the early research is introduced, such as strategies for event selection into the event part. In a memory-based rule engine, the condition could be some tests on local data and actions could be updates to object attributes. In a database system, the condition could simply be a query to the database, with the result set (if not null) being passed to the action part for changes to the database. In either case, actions could also be calls to external programs or remote procedures. Note that for database usage, updates to the database are regarded as internal events. As a consequence, the execution of the action part of an active rule can match the event part of the same or another active rule, thus triggering it. The equivalent in a memory-based rule engine would be to invoke an external method that caused an external event to trigger another ECA rule. ECA rules can also be used in rule engines that use variants of the Rete algorithm for rule processing. == ECA rule engines == Rulecore Concurrent Rules Apart Database Detect Invocation Rules ConceptBase ECArules
Physical access
Physical access is a term in computer security that refers to the ability of people to physically gain access to a computer system. According to Gregory White, "Given physical access to an office, the knowledgeable attacker will quickly be able to find the information needed to gain access to the organization's computer systems and network." == Attacks and countermeasures == === Attacks === Physical access opens up a variety of avenues for hacking. Michael Meyers notes that "the best network software security measures can be rendered useless if you fail to physically protect your systems," since an intruder could simply walk off with a server and crack the password at his leisure. Physical access also allows hardware keyloggers to be installed. An intruder may be able to boot from a CD or other external media and then read unencrypted data on the hard drive. They may also exploit a lack of access control in the boot loader; for instance, pressing F8 while certain versions of Microsoft Windows are booting, specifying 'init=/bin/sh' as a boot parameter to Linux (usually done by editing the command line in GRUB), etc. One could also use a rogue device to access a poorly secured wireless network; if the signal were sufficiently strong, one might not even need to breach the perimeter. === Countermeasures === IT security standards in the United States typically call for physical access to be limited by locked server rooms, sign-in sheets, etc. Physical access systems and IT security systems have historically been administered by separate departments of organizations, but are increasingly being seen as having interdependent functions needing a single, converged security policy. An IT department could, for instance, check security log entries for suspicious logons occurring after business hours, and then use keycard swipe records from a building access control system to narrow down the list of suspects to those who were in the building at that time. Surveillance cameras might also be used to deter or detect unauthorized access.
Stencil buffer
A stencil buffer is an extra data buffer, in addition to the color buffer and Z-buffer, found on modern graphics hardware. The buffer is per pixel and works on integer values, usually with a depth of one byte per pixel. The Z-buffer and stencil buffer often share the same area in the RAM of the graphics hardware. In the simplest case, the stencil buffer is used to limit the area of rendering (stenciling). More advanced usage of the stencil buffer makes use of the strong connection between the Z-buffer and the stencil buffer in the rendering pipeline. For example, stencil values can be automatically increased/decreased for every pixel that fails or passes the depth test. The simple combination of depth test and stencil modifiers make a vast number of effects possible (such as stencil shadow volumes, Two-Sided Stencil, compositing, decaling, dissolves, fades, swipes, silhouettes, outline drawing, or highlighting of intersections between complex primitives) though they often require several rendering passes and, therefore, can put a heavy load on the graphics hardware. The most typical application is still to add shadows to 3D applications. It is also used for planar reflections. Other rendering techniques, such as portal rendering, use the stencil buffer in other ways; for example, it can be used to find the area of the screen obscured by a portal and re-render those pixels correctly. The stencil buffer and its modifiers can be accessed in computer graphics by using APIs like OpenGL, Direct3D, Vulkan or Metal. == Architecture == The stencil buffer typically shares the same memory space as the Z-buffer, and typically the ratio is 24 bits for Z-buffer + 8 bits for stencil buffer or, in the past, 15 bits for Z-buffer + 1 bit for stencil buffer. Another variant is 4 + 24, where 28 of the 32 bits are used and 4 ignored. Stencil and Z-buffers are part of the frame buffer, coupled to the color buffer. The first chip available to a wider market was 3Dlabs' Permedia II, which supported a one-bit stencil buffer. The bits allocated to the stencil buffer can be used to represent numerical values in the range [0, 2n-1], and also as a Boolean matrix (n is the number of allocated bits), each of which may be used to control the particular part of the scene. Any combination of these two ways of using the available memory is also possible. == Stencil test == Stencil test or stenciling is among the operations on the pixels/fragments (Per-pixel operations), located after the alpha test, and before the depth test. The stencil test ensures undesired pixels do not reach the depth test. This saves processing time for the scene. Similarly, the alpha test can prevent corresponding pixels to reach the stencil test. The test itself is carried out over the stencil buffer to some value in it, or altered or used it, and carried out through the so-called stencil function and stencil operations. The stencil function is a function by which the stencil value of a certain pixel is compared to a given reference value. If this comparison is logically true, the stencil test passes. Otherwise not. In doing so, the possible reaction caused by the result of comparing three different state-depth and stencil buffer: Stencil test is not passed Stencil test is passed but not the depth test Both tests are passed (or stencil test is passed, and the depth is not enabled) For each of these cases, different operations can be set over the examined pixel. In the OpenGL stencil functions, the reference value and mask, respectively, define the function glStencilFunc. In Direct3D each of these components is adjusted individually using methods SetRenderState devices currently in control. This method expects two parameters, the first of which is a condition that is set and the other its value. In the order that was used above, these conditions are called D3DRS_STENCILFUNC, D3DRS_STENCILREF, and D3DRS_STENCILMASK. Stencil operations in OpenGL adjust glStencilOp function that expects three values. In Direct3D, again, each state sets a specific method SetRenderState. The three states that can be assigned to surgery are called D3DRS_STENCILFAIL, D3DRENDERSTATE_STENCILZFAIL, and D3DRENDERSTATE_STENCILPASS. == Z-fighting == Due to the lack of precision in the Z-buffer, coplanar polygons that are short-range, or overlapping, can be portrayed as a single plane with a multitude of irregular cross-sections. These sections can vary depending on the camera position and other parameters and are rapidly changing. This is called Z-fighting. There exist multiple solutions to this issue: - Bring the far plane closer to restrict the scene's depth, thus increasing the accuracy of the Z-buffer, or reducing the distance at which objects are visible in the scene. - Increase the number of bits allocated to the Z-buffer, which is possible at the expense of memory for the stencil buffer. - Move polygons farther apart from one another, which restricts the possibilities for the artist to create an elaborate scene. All of these approaches to the problem can only reduce the likelihood that the polygons will experience Z-fighting, and do not guarantee a definitive solution in the general case. A solution that includes the stencil buffer is based on the knowledge of which polygon should be in front of the others. The silhouette of the front polygon is drawn into the stencil buffer. After that, the rest of the scene can be rendered only where the silhouette is negative, and so will not clash with the front polygon. == Shadow volume == Shadow volume is a technique used in 3D computer graphics to add shadows to a rendered scene. They were first proposed by Frank Crow in 1977 as the geometry describing the 3D shape of the region occluded from a light source. A shadow volume divides the virtual world in two: areas that are in shadow and areas that are not. The stencil buffer implementation of shadow volumes is generally considered among the most practical general-purpose real-time shadowing techniques for use on modern 3D graphics hardware. It has been popularised by the video game Doom 3, and a particular variation of the technique used in this game has become known as Carmack's Reverse. == Reflections == Reflection of a scene is drawn as the scene itself transformed and reflected relative to the "mirror" plane, which requires multiple render passes and using of stencil buffer to restrict areas where the current render pass works: Draw the scene excluding mirror areas – for each mirror lock the Z-buffer and color buffer Render visible part of the mirror Depth test is set up so that each pixel is passed to enter the maximum value and always passes for each mirror: Depth test is set so that it passes only if the distance of a pixel is less than the current (default behavior) The matrix transformation is changed to reflect the scene relative to the mirror plane Unlock the Z-buffer and color buffer Draw the scene, but only the part of it that lies between the mirror plane and the camera. In other words, a mirror plane is also a clipping plane Again locks color buffer, depth test is set so that it always passes, reset stencil for the next mirror. == Planar Shadows == While drawing a plane of shadows, there are two dominant problems: The first concerns the problem of deep struggle in case the flat geometry is not awarded on the part covered with the shadow of shadows and outside. See the section that relates to this. Another problem relates to the extent of the shadows outside the area where the plane there. Another problem, which may or may not appear, depending on the technique, the design of more polygons in one part of the shadow, resulting in darker and lighter parts of the same shade. All three problems can be solved geometrically, but because of the possibility that hardware acceleration is directly used, it is a far more elegant implementation using the stencil buffer: 1. Enable lights and the lights 2. Draw a scene without any polygon that should be projected shadows 3. Draw all polygons which should be projected shadows, but without lights. In doing so, the stencil buffer, the pixel of each polygon to be assigned to a specific value for the ground to which they belong. The distance between these values should be at least two, because for each plane to be used two values for two states: in the shadows and bright. 4. Disable any global illumination (to ensure that the next steps will affect only individual selected light) For each plane: For each light: 1. Edit a stencil buffer and only the pixels that carry a specific value for the selected level. Increase the value of all the pixels that are projected objects between the date of a given level and bright. 2. Allow only selected light for him to draw level at which part of her specific value was not changed. == Spatial shadows == Stencil buffer implementation of spatial drawing shadows is any shadow of a geometric body that its volume includes part of the scene that is
Intelligent decision support system
An intelligent decision support system (IDSS) is a decision support system that makes extensive use of artificial intelligence (AI) techniques. Use of AI techniques in management information systems has a long history – indeed terms such as "Knowledge-based systems" (KBS) and "intelligent systems" have been used since the early 1980s to describe components of management systems, but the term "Intelligent decision support system" is thought to originate with Clyde Holsapple and Andrew Whinston in the late 1970s. Examples of specialized intelligent decision support systems include Flexible manufacturing systems (FMS), intelligent marketing decision support systems and medical diagnosis systems. Ideally, an intelligent decision support system should behave like a human consultant: supporting decision makers by gathering and analysing evidence, identifying and diagnosing problems, proposing possible courses of action and evaluating such proposed actions. The aim of the AI techniques embedded in an intelligent decision support system is to enable these tasks to be performed by a computer, while emulating human capabilities as closely as possible. Many IDSS implementations are based on expert systems, a well established type of KBS that encode knowledge and emulate the cognitive behaviours of human experts using predicate logic rules, and have been shown to perform better than the original human experts in some circumstances. Expert systems emerged as practical applications in the 1980s based on research in artificial intelligence performed during the late 1960s and early 1970s. They typically combine knowledge of a particular application domain with an inference capability to enable the system to propose decisions or diagnoses. Accuracy and consistency can be comparable to (or even exceed) that of human experts when the decision parameters are well known (e.g. if a common disease is being diagnosed), but performance can be poor when novel or uncertain circumstances arise. Research in AI focused on enabling systems to respond to novelty and uncertainty in more flexible ways is starting to be used in IDSS. For example, intelligent agents that perform complex cognitive tasks without any need for human intervention have been used in a range of decision support applications. Capabilities of these intelligent agents include knowledge sharing, machine learning, data mining, and automated inference. A range of AI techniques such as case based reasoning, rough sets and fuzzy logic have also been used to enable decision support systems to perform better in uncertain conditions. A 2009 research about a multi-artificial system intelligence system named IILS is proposed to automate problem-solving processes within the logistics industry. The system involves integrating intelligence modules based on case-based reasoning, multi-agent systems, fuzzy logic, and artificial neural networks aiming to offer advanced logistics solutions and support in making well-informed, high-quality decisions to address a wide range of customer needs and challenges.
Shaded Picture System
The Shaded Picture System was a 3D raster computer display processor introduced by Evans & Sutherland in October 1973. The Shaded Picture System was the first general-purpose, commercially available raster computer graphics display processor capable of real-time, shaded 3D graphics. It could only display black and white graphics at a resolution of 256 by 256. It was extremely expensive, and very few units were ever sold. == History == The principles of shaded, hidden-line true 3D graphics were pioneered at the University of Utah in 1967. However, this algorithm was slow and would take several minutes to produce an image. In 1970, Gary Watkins developed a FORTRAN simulator of a faster algorithm that would theoretically generate shaded 3D images in real-time, "if implemented in suitable hardware". The simulator itself was still not capable of real-time shaded 3D image rendering. Evans & Sutherland developed a functional prototype of this "suitable hardware", which was later sold as the Shaded Picture System in 1973. About a year earlier in 1972, Evans & Sutherland sold the first and only CT1 to Case Western Reserve University. The CT1, or Continuous Tone 1, was a specialized image generator, not meant as a marketable or mass-produced product. At the time, the CT1, along with G.E./NASA's upgraded Electronic Scene Generator from 1971, would have been the only real-time raster graphics systems sold to customers comparable to the Shaded Picture System, although both the CT1 and Electronic Scene Generator were intentionally produced as one-off products and specialized for the needs of their customers. The Shaded Picture System, in contrast, was intentionally marketed.In early 1975, Evans & Sutherland demonstrated a random-access video frame buffer using relatively low-cost semiconductor memory, which was much more capable than the Shaded Picture System. When interfaced with a (non-shaded) E&S Picture System, the frame buffer had a resolution of 512 by 512 in grayscale and partial color capabilities. By the end of 1975, this frame buffer was commercially available.